As you may or may not know, recently, the Boston Globe published a page one, above-the-fold, feature news story claiming that declining retention rates for West Point graduates are due to "repeated tours of duty in Iraq." While Bryan Bender, the author of the piece, went to great lengths to show that retention rates---at the end of the service requirement---are indeed lower than typical for classes graduating six to seven years ago, his "proof" that this was related to the War in Iraq was tangential, and, at best, anecdotal.

I'm a freelance journalist, and I'd like to write a piece disputing Bender's claim. If you're a West Point graduate currently serving or expecting to leave the service soon, or if you know someone who fits the bill, I'd like to correspond with you. Drop me a line at spiritofseventyfive at gmail.com.

his "proof" that this was related to the War in Iraq was tangential, and, at best, anecdotal.

Liberals don't need no stinkin proof. Just look at Global Warming, it is anecdotal evidence, but yet the group-think is telling us the science is settled based on evidence that does not pass scientific mustard.

Liberals don't need no stinkin proof. Just look at Global Warming, it is anecdotal evidence, but yet the group-think is telling us the science is settled based on evidence that does not pass scientific mustard.

My sentiments exactly, and the piece I'm talking about was a classic example of advocacy journalism. If I can help it, though, I don't want to let it stand, that's why I want to write this piece. Especially because it rips on West Point grads.

Environmental controls are merely ploys to control America’s use of her own resources and put the control into the hands of the world community.

Which proves that the liberal agenda is socialistic and working toward one world government.

How do other nations gain control of America and her resources and wealth for their own use? How do other nations prevent America remaining a superpower?

Look at the democrat agenda in the schools, in environmentalist controls, in the handling of America’s superpower military. Democrats need ignorant people uneducated in American ideals to believe that the media propaganda is the truth.

If the declining rate claim is true, to whom do we owe this change?? I submit, the sniveling liberals feeding/controlling the old media and liberal anti-American politicians are mostly responsible for undermining the war effort. How do we expect our warriors to react to such treatment by their own countrymen?

You might break it down into male vs female, white vs minority , and major vs Army job.............Itll probably boil down to money in the long run.........

That's what I'd suspect as well---some people just aren't lifers, and they're getting out just because they want to get out. It may or may not be related to Iraq, but this story would have you believe West Pointers are resigning their commissions so they don't have to go back to Iraq.

If the declining rate claim is true, to whom do we owe this change?? I submit, the sniveling liberals feeding/controlling the old media and liberal anti-American politicians are mostly responsible for undermining the war effort. How do we expect our warriors to react to such treatment by their own countrymen?

Exactly! One one hand, the Globe bemoans this "loss" of the elite officer corps, and on the other, it tells them that their sacrifices are being wasted. What do they expect to happen?

I have no doubt that the declining retention rates are directly related to the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, I believe they are not so much related to the war as they are related to blatant undermining of the war effort by political operatives and mainstream media in the United States. I say this from experience. There is not a day in my life where I was not affiliated with the USAF as a dependent, cadet, aircrew member or retiree. I can trace my military lineage From Operation Desert Storm back through Vietnam, Korea and WWII to the Civil War. My family is very pro military and proud of America's Soldiers.

Since Korea, the American Military's prime adversary has not been enemy combatants. Rather, the primary adversary has been a crumbling American society encouraged, nurtured and brainwashed by the mainstream American media managed by the radical extremists of the 1960's cultural revolution. The radical extremists managed to get most college newspapers "thrown" off campus, where they flourished with spurious funding funneled from America's enemies. As they graduated and moved into the mainstream, they grew like a cancer until they firmly controlled the mainstream media, which they transformed into a radical propaganda ministry. From this unofficial perch as the information overlords for American society, they filtered information and bombarded the masses with radical propaganda transforming masses of Americans into programmed zombies who react to comfort stimuli like man made "droids" with no soul. At some point soldiers may decide put their families ahead of the soulless zombies lead by more soulless politicians. I believe many soldiers are making a tactical retreat protecting their families and letting the front lines approach and consume the soulless zombies. Eventually, when the zombies are slaughtered and their consumption patterns get interrupted in enough calamitous events, the zombies may awaken. Hopefully, it will be in time to make a "last stand" before our destruction.

I believe many soldiers are making a tactical retreat protecting their families and letting the front lines approach and consume the soulless zombies.

I might not go this far, but I do think the sentiment you express is largely correct, and it goes towards a point I made above: Perhaps many are questioning their dedication and sacrifice in relation to what they're hearing from those loud voices advocating a certain position in the media, or from what they're seeing in the upper echelons of command, both civilian and military. West Pointers are not stupid people (Army/Navy rivalries aside) . . . they, moreso than others, perhaps, can see the writing on the wall. Maybe they're asking themselves if they should put their lives on the line---for this?

I say yes, but my background is journalism, so I'm probably jaded. The MSM---and in this case, I'm talking about newspapers---is saveable ONLY if they decide to become honest in their news reporting. My big beef with this piece was that it demonstrated beyond any shadow of a doubt that the wall between the editorial department and news department no longer existed at the Globe. If this piece had appeared on the editorial page, I'd have no problem with it---it's opinion.

By being honest, I mean build that wall back up between editorial and news. And don't pretend to be objective---in journalism, there's no such thing as objectivity. Every piece has an angle, or a slant, so it can't, by nature, be objective. As long as the news consumer knows the paper has a particular slant, there's nothing wrong with non-objectivity. The paper should be upfront about it---too many people accept what they read in the paper to be unquestionable fact.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.